Skip to content

· Private foundation

Malarkey Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$220k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2024.

Health$160kArts & Culture$110kCivil Rights$50kFood & Nutrition$30kHuman Services$30kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $120k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$25,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$4.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING$50,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
PACIFIC REFUGEE SUPPORT GROUP$30,000
TREVOR PROJECT$25,000
FAMILY EQUALITY$25,000
CHELSEA HICKS FOUNDATION$15,000
EVOLVE PINK$15,000
OREGON FOOD BANK$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PACIFIC REFUGEE SUPPORT GROUP: $30k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$315k · 6 repeat orgs$115k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
2

Total granted

$315k
$35k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+2%
+30%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $80k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’23’24
HealthArts & CultureCivil RightsEducationRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING
    2× · 2023–2024 · $100k · revenue +2%
  • TREVOR PROJECT INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $75k · revenue +2%
  • OREGON FOOD BANK
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +5%

Funded once

  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE COLUMBIA WILLAMETTE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +30%
  • UC
    UNIVERSITY CLUB FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +11%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Oregon Center for Public Policy

The oregon center for public policy's mission is to achieve economic justice for all oregonians through research, analysis, and advocacy. ocpp works to change policies that foster economic security and stability for all oregonians. we do…

Employment
2
Northwest Network Btlg Survivors Abuse0

The Northwest Network of Bisexual Trans Lesbians and Gay Survivors of Abuse supports queer and trans survivors in reconnecting to their self-determination through advocacy-based counseling and community education.

Health
3
Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest

To ensure broad public access to sexual and reproductive health care through direct service, education and advocacy.

Health
4
Options Pregnancy Resource Centers Inc

Empowering life-affirming decisions

Health
5
International Planned Parenthood Federation Western Hemisphere Region

Ippfwhr (dba fos feminista) aims to improve the quality of life of individuals by campaigning for sexual and reproductive health and rights through advocacy and services, especially for poor and vulnerable people. we defend the right of…

International
6
Lavender Rights Project

Lavender Rights Project elevates the power, autonomy, and leadership of the black intersex & gender diverse community through intersectional legal and social services. We utilize the law as an organizing principle to affirm our civil…

Crime & Legal
7
Basic Rights Oregon

Basic rights oregon will ensure that all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender oregonians experience equality by building a broad and inclusive politically powerful movement, shifting public opinion, and achieving policy victories.

—
8
Planned Parenthood North Central States Foundation

To build and maintain financial support for planned parenthood north central states to advance and protect sexual and reproductive health care for all.

Human Services
9
Pridefest Pride Fest

To elevate lgbtq people through arts and advocacy, honor our past, fight for a better future, and celebrate our collective successes.

Recreation & Sports
10
Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho

To provide exceptional reproductive and complementary health care services, honest education, and advocacy for all.

Health
11
University of Oregon Foundation

The purpose and mission of the foundation are, acting on its own or through affiliates, to support and assist the university of oregon in its activities by management and administration of foundation assets representing privately donated…

Education
12
Planned Parenthood Great Northwest Hawaii Alaska Indiana and Kentucky

The mission of planned parenthood great northwest hawaii alaska indiana and kentucky is to support the lifelong sexual health of women and men, and foster a community where every child is a wanted child. we accomplish this through:…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood of the Columbia Willamette Inc; the most unlike its peers is Evolve Pink Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 10 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING: $100,000 · Arts & CultureOREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTINGEvolve Pink Inc: $30,000 · HealthEvolve Pink IncCHELSEA HICKS FOUNDATION: $30,000 · HealthCHELSEA HICKS FOUNDATI…PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE COLUMBIA WILLAMETTE INC: $25,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF …Individual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant reci…OREGON FOOD BANK: $30,000 · OtherOREGON FOOD BANKTREVOR PROJECT INC: $75,000 · Civil RightsTREVOR PROJECT INCFAMILY EQUALITY: $50,000 · EducationFAMILY EQUALI…PACIFIC REFUGEE SUPPORT GROUP: $30,000 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY CLUB FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports
Arts & Culture$100,000Health$85,000Other$80,000Civil Rights$75,000Education$50,000Human Services$30,000Recreation & Sports$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING: $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY EQUALITY: $50,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetOREGON FOOD BANK: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEvolve Pink Inc: $30,000 over 2y, 21% of budgetPACIFIC REFUGEE SUPPORT GROUP: $30,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCHELSEA HICKS FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE COLUMBIA WILLAMETTE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY CLUB FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Malarkey Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Malarkey Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • Oregon Food Bank: 21% of income from government
  • Planned Parenthood of the Columbia Willamette Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Oregon Public Broadcasting: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Malarkey Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Malarkey Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 10 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Malarkey Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph